Jim, we maintain our PACS system locally, and separate from our EMR.
There are hard links between the EMR and PACS, so when a patient's record
is open in the EMR, there is simply a button to press to launch their
records in the PACS viewer.
I really couldn't imagine increasing the load on our EMR with data from the
PACS.
Our current EMR (hosted offsite - aka cloud) currently has 20 GB of
attachments, our PACS database file alone in 38 GB, and the actual images
clock in at a bit over 19 TB.
Aside from the storage aspect, the network transfer load would be quite
high. Even with the 100 Mbps full duplex fiber connection we have to the
outside world, it cannot hold a candle to the speed of our local network
for image transfer & display.
Beyond that, AWS S3 Standard (no data retrieval fees) costs for storing
that data would run around $450 a month
So our low data load systems are all currently hosted (EPM and EMR - both
run off of AWS services) but PACS is local. It just fits our needs the best.
sandor
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 7:09 AM Jim Soque <jsoque@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We place PDF's of FA, OPTOS and OCT images onto our in-house server and
then import them into EMR and patients records.
Has anyone experienced any issues when making the transfer to using a
Cloud Based EMR system?
Curious as to how you are exporting them. Do you send your images
directly into files that are held in the Cloud, or, are your images held on
an in house server first, prior to uploading them to your Cloud based EMR
system?
Thanks!
